Max Planck Institute for Foreign and International Criminal Law

Coping with widespread or so-called "mass" crime and petty crime is a central problem in many legal systems. Difficulties arise not only from the strain on the justice agencies, but also with respect to a meaningful treatment of this form of crime. In Italy, the problem of court docket congestion – which is exacerbated by Italy’s strict principle of mandatory prosecution – is especially serious. This congestion leads to an increase in the duration of proceedings and ultimately to a situation in which many cases cannot be concluded before they become barred by the statute of limitations.

Reforms undertaken in the area of petty and widespread or mass crime are supposed to provide a remedy. In addition to the comprehensive decriminalizations of 1999/2000, the outsourcing of certain minor offenses from ordinary jurisdiction is of primary significance. Since 2002, the justice of the peace (giudice di pace) has exercised exclusive jurisdiction over these offenses. The aim of the reform is not only to relieve the courts, however, but also to introduce lenience and efficiency as the guidelines for proceedings before the justice of the peace. In addition, the interests of the victim are to be given the highest possible consideration. A unique substantive and procedural "microsystem" that is comprised of a simplified proceeding, alternative disposition options, and an amended sanctioning system with new forms of punishment is placed at the disposal of the justice of the peace. These creative and modern Italian approaches to reform have not yet been studied in the German language.

The goal of this research project is to present and to analyze the Italian innovations from a German perspective. The research is less concerned with the figure of the justice of the peace, as such, than with the mechanisms of early disposition of proceedings that are available to him or her and the new forms of sanctions that were introduced in this area. With an eye towards the possibility of reform in other legal systems, the question as to the extent to which the Italian innovations have been successful is also addressed.

Methodologically, the presentation, analysis, and assessment of the Italian reform are conducted through evaluation of the Italian norms themselves and of the relevant academic literature. In the process, the advantages and disadvantages of the individual institutions as well as their practical functions are studied on the basis of an analysis of the literature. In conclusion, a summary appraisal is conducted with a view towards whether the goals of the reform can actually be achieved.

One finding is that the availability of mechanisms for alternative dispositions facilitates the satisfactory resolution of criminal proceedings for minor offenses even without the imposition of punishment. Difficulties have been experienced in interpretation and implementation, however, which is why the institutions are only partially attractive for the defense. Accordingly, their application in practice is, to date, still disappointing.

It is primarily the relinquishment of the possibility of a prison sentence that makes proceedings before the justice of the peace attractive. In principle, both of the new, modern sanctioning forms of house arrest and community service, which have great potential for resocialization, can be evaluated positively. The concrete regulations are not, however conducive to application in practice. Thus, in actual practice, fines are imposed in the majority of cases in the justice of the peace system.

All in all, the Italian reform provides much food for thought for reform projects directed at coping with petty and widespread crime. All legislative shortcomings identified in this project are remediable. The reform thus presents an important step in the direction of a new, modern criminal law whose character is fundamentally influenced by the principle of mediation and by restorative, compensatory thinking.